Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

>> Will everyone believe the war on terrorism isn't just a conspiracy when European cities are bombed? (Taken from the London Bombings thread)

The war on terrorism isn't just a conspiracy. However, neither is it just a campaign for national security, or for freedom and democracy. I felt this discussion deserved it's own thread.

Many people speak in enormous extremes when discussing the idea of conspiracy behind terrorism and the war on terrorism. Some suggest incredible ideas, such as the idea that World Trade Centre was intentionally weakend with American-set bombs to create a fantastic display as part of an elaborate ruse used to justify interference into the affairs of other nations and in the private lives of American citizens.

Many others retort with extreme devotion to their nation and the words which come over the presidential pulpit, calling ludicrous those who should doubt the intent behind the actions of their democratically elected government. Some of these individuals call for the use of even greater force in the Middle East, to "root out" once and for all the terrorists who did such damage to America on September 11th and in other incidents.

A more balanced, objective perspective sees that the war on terrorism is a legitimate campaign with a legitimate cause which is used to veil the illegitimate and definitely unethical intrusion into other nation's affairs for the purpose of furthering the dominating agenda of America and it's closest allies. That is clear.

Even if the war on terrorism was not being used to distract the common person from the real objective behind actions taken in it's name, the war on terrorism would still be an entirely ridiculous campaign. Attacking and removing the leaders of terrorist organizations does not address the root cause of terrorism. So long as the root cause of terrorism is left unaddressed, other leaders will appear to replace those who are removed by American efforts. Without addressing it's root cause, terrorism will always exist.

The root cause of terrorism is the illegitamate and definitely unethical intrusion into other nation's affairs for the purpose of futhering the dominating agenda of America and it's closest allies. The war on terrorism has been, since it's first successful campaigns, contributive to terrorism's root cause. Regardless of whether or not it's true that the intent of America's coalition is compassionate, to install democracy in the middle east and loosen the grip of totalitarianism in the region, the war on terrorism only contributes to this and other related problems.

Terrorism itself has been a foolish endeavour. In attempting to dissuade impinging nations from continuing their interference in the political and cultural affairs of sovreign nations, these terrorist leaders have only succeeded in granting those impinging nations an easy excuse to ramp up their efforts. They have only invited more intrusion.

And so it will ping-pong back and forth like this until one group or the other finally decides to walk away from the table. Civilian casualties in Iraq will invite bus-bombs in London, which may invite more aggressive behaviour toward Iran or another Middle Eastern country, which may invite subway sabotage in New Jersey, on and on like this for an indeterminable period of time, all of it tangled up in an indecipherable myriad of lies and half truths designed to harness public opinion and use it like a sail, and all of it hinging on the pride, the selfishness, and the anger of a very small group of people on either side of the conflict.

Quote:Ped said:A more balanced, objective perspective sees that the war on terrorism is a legitimate campaign with a legitimate cause which is used to veil the illegitimate and definitely unethical intrusion into other nation's affairs for the purpose of furthering the dominating agenda of America and it's closest allies. That is clear.

The objective of the war on terrorism is to kill terrorists and those who support terrorists. Everyone knows the realities of what our country does, intrusive or not, it doesn't take away from the fact that those who kill our citizens for any reason don't deserve life nor the waste of time understanding their purpose.

Quote:Ped said:Attacking and removing the leaders of terrorist organizations does not address the root cause of terrorism. So long as the root cause of terrorism is left unaddressed, other leaders will appear to replace those who are removed by American efforts. Without addressing it's root cause, terrorism will always exist.

The root cause of terrorism is the illegitamate and definitely unethical intrusion into other nation's affairs for the purpose of futhering the dominating agenda of America and it's closest allies. The war on terrorism has been, since it's first successful campaigns, contributive to terrorism's root cause. Regardless of whether or not it's true that the intent of America's coalition is compassionate, to install democracy in the middle east and loosen the grip of totalitarianism in the region, the war on terrorism only contributes to this and other related problems.

Terrorism itself has been a foolish endeavour. In attempting to dissuade impinging nations from continuing their interference in the political and cultural affairs of sovreign nations, these terrorist leaders have only succeeded in granting those impinging nations an easy excuse to ramp up their efforts. They have only invited more intrusion.

Oh goodness, it gets better!

Killing the terrorists is only thing we can do to them. To give them the benefit of understanding is accepting the killing of innocent people as a means of gaining political power. If you want to stay consistent, change your last paragraph from,

Terrorism itself has been a foolish endeavour.

to: Terrorism itself is very effective, and by listening to their demands and idealogy we can further succumb to their every whim in the name of peace!

we'll just have to take nuke them before they nuke us. or we could let israel wipe out the whole middle east by themselves, they don't even need nukes. They could probably take over all the countries around them in 30 days flat.

Quote:downforpot said:we'll just have to take nuke them before they nuke us. or we could let israel wipe out the whole middle east by themselves, they don't even need nukes. They could probably take over all the countries around them in 30 days flat.

Just like we took over Iraq in 30 days flat -- how's that working out for us by the way?

--------------------?When Alexander the Great visted the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: 'Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.' It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.?
-Henry Hazlitt in 'Economics in One Lesson'

Quote:downforpot said:we'll just have to take nuke them before they nuke us. or we could let israel wipe out the whole middle east by themselves, they don't even need nukes. They could probably take over all the countries around them in 30 days flat.

Just like we took over Iraq in 30 days flat -- how's that working out for us by the way?

Quite well, really. Do you honestly think that we've "failed" in Iraq? Compare our casuality count there with some other wars that we have definatly won (say, the big dub-dubs), and with wars that we've lost. Which does it look like more? We've taken over their country, trained troops, installed a new government. If people in the military die while this is happening, well, thats why they call it war instead of "massive slaughter". It's just how shit goes down.

Quote:those who kill our citizens for any reason don't deserve life nor the waste of time understanding their purpose.

Know the enemy and know yourself

In a hundred battles you will never be in peril.

When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself

Your chances of winning and losing are equal.

If ignorant both of your enemy and of yourself

You are certain in every battle to be in peril.

Sun Tzu, The Art Of War

Cute response, but lets really analyze that. By "understanding" your enemies, he doesn't mean a metaphor for caring about their feelings and the struggles of being a poor muslim. Nope... Sun Tzu's art of war was speaking on conditions directly related to war, as in military logistics. By understanding the tactics, groups...etc..etc we can better kill them, but make no mistake... knowing why they do what they do is not up for debate when it comes to "understanding".

Quote:Quite well, really. Do you honestly think that we've "failed" in Iraq?

Never said that. Not yet at least. Do YOU honestly think that we've "succeeded" in Iraq?

Quote:Compare our casuality count there with some other wars that we have definatly won (say, the big dub-dubs), and with wars that we've lost. Which does it look like more?

Don't even know what to make of this. The nature of the wars is so different that using one as some measure of the other is laughable. Is any war to be gauged a success if it keeps its' casualty figures under WWII numbers? How convenient.

Quote:We've taken over their country

We most certainly have.

Quote: trained troops

Just a few more trained Iraqi troops and the tide will be turned, eh? We shall see.

Quote:installed a new government.

Installed, ouch. Poor choice of words? Freudian slip?

Quote:If people in the military die while this is happening, well, thats why they call it war instead of "massive slaughter". It's just how shit goes down.

People in the military are dying, Iraqi citizens are dying (to a much larger extent) -- I'm just not so sure that each pint of blood that's spilt brings us that much closer to the end game.

--------------------?When Alexander the Great visted the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: 'Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.' It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.?
-Henry Hazlitt in 'Economics in One Lesson'